Het lectoraat Co-Design van Hogeschool Utrecht doet met een systemisch-inclusieve ontwerpende aanpak praktijkgericht onderzoek, om complexe maatschappelijke vraagstukken te helpen oplossen. Binnen die onderzoeken stellen we vragen over het ontwerpproces en de mensen die daarbij betrokken zijn. Hoe kun je goed co-designen in de weerbarstige werkelijkheid? Wat kan helpen in die ontwerpende aanpak? Hoe kunnen mensen die niet zijn opgeleid als ontwerpers volwaardig meedoen in het ontwerpproces, en wat hebben zij daarvoor nodig aan ontwerpend vermogen? De kennis over ontwerpend vermogen die we de afgelopen vier jaar hebben opgedaan, delen we in dit boekje. We hebben dat proces getekend en beschreven als een reisverhaal van Co, die ons meeneemt op een boot over een rivier, door stroomversnellingen en langs landschappen. Met bijdragen van: Marry Bassa, Anita Cremers, Tanja Enninga, Anita van Essen, Christa van Gessel, Berit Godfroij, Joep Kuijper, Remko van der Lugt, Caroline Maessen, Lenny van Onselen, Dirk Ploos van Amstel, Karlijn van Ramshorst, Carolijn Schrijver, Fenne Verhoeven, Danielle Vossebeld, Rosa de Vries
DOCUMENT
Emergency care (from ambulance to emergency room) is focused on somatic care: fixing the body. When a patient with mental dysregulation who experiences ‘disproportionate feelings like fear, anger, sadness or confusion, possibly with associated behaviours’ (Van de Glind et al. 2023) does not get appropriate attention, this can result in the disruption of treatment and even psychological trauma upon trauma. To improve the emergency care process, the authors of this paper - health researchers and design researchers engaged in a project based on the experience-based co-design (EBCD) approach (Donetto et al. 2015; Bate and Robert 2007). EBCD is a method used to design better experiences in healthcare settings, in cooperation with (former) patients and healthcare professionals. The process of EBCD involves partnerships between stakeholders and the discovery and sensemaking of experiences through specialized methods to gain an understanding of the interface between user and service, to design new experiences (Bate and Robert 2007, 31). There is, however, an interesting challenge in bringing patients and care professionals together. In emergency care, patients depend greatly on their healthcare providers. The patients in this study had existing mental vulnerabilities and may have been traumatized by previous visits. We needed to enable these stakeholders to be equal partners with ownership and power, one of the characteristics of co-design in EBCD (Donetto et al. 2015). In this paper, we describe how we adapted and applied the EBCD method, with a focus on creating equal partnerships. We also reflect on the extent of our success and the diBiculties we encountered in attaining this objective.
DOCUMENT
The numerous grand challenges around us demand new approaches to build alternative sustainable futures collectively. Whereas these so-called co-design processes are becoming more mainstream, many multi-stakeholder coalitions lack practical guidance in these dynamic and systemic challenges based on entangled relationships, interactions, and experiences between stakeholders and their environments. Although scholars and practitioners convey a lot of co-design theories and methods, there does not seem to be a practical instrument beyond methods that supports new coalitions with an overview of a co-design process to come and in making shared and fundamental co-design decisions. Therefore, this paper proposes the empathic Co-Design Canvas as a new intermediate-level knowledge product existing of eight co-design decision cards, which together make up the Canvas as a whole. The Canvas is based on an existing theoretical framework defined by Lee et al. (2018), an empirical case study, and a diversity of experiences in education and practice. It aims at supporting multi-stakeholder coalitions to flexibly plan, conduct, and evaluate a co-design process. Moreover, the Canvas encourages coalitions to not only discuss the problematic context, a common purpose, envisioned impact, concrete results, and each other’s interests and knowledge, but also power, which can create trust, a more equal level playing field and empathy, and help manage expectations, which is greatly needed to overcome today’s grand challenges.
LINK
Our society faces many challenges, necessitating collaborative efforts among multiple stakeholders. Our students learn this in living labs. This paper explores preliminary research on introducing co-design to novices. We introduce a case study exploring how design educators can support students in developing co-design competencies. Central to this study is our Co-Design Canvas, introduced as a pivotal tool for fostering open dialogue among diverse stakeholders. This stimulates collaboration through effective teamwork and empathic formation. The research questions aim to discover effective methods for introducing the Co-Design Canvas to living lab students, and to identify the necessary prior knowledge and expertise for both novices and educators to effectively engage with and teach the Co-Design Canvas. The paper advocates for a pedagogical shift to effectively engage students in multi-stakeholder challenges. Through a series of workshops, the Co-Design Canvas was introduced to novices. We found that this required a significant cognitive stretch for staff and students. The paper concludes by presenting a, for now, final workshop format consisting of assignments that supports introducing the Canvas and thereby co design to societal impact design novices. This program better prepares students and coaches for multi stakeholder challenges within living labs.
MULTIFILE
During the Dutch Design Week 2020 (DDW2020), researchers of the project ‘Creative & Health Innovation Ways of Working Analysis’ (CHIWaWA) organized together with UCreate an online session on "Co-design in the 1.5 meter society", as part of the program "Embassy of Health" (World Design Embassies). In this online session, five guest speakers presented a case on how COVID-19 has changed the co-design approach in research and design projects. Three cases are Dutch projects in creative industry, and two are research projects from Eindhoven University of Technology.
DOCUMENT
Co-creation as a concept and process has been prominent in both marketing and design research over the past ten years. Referring respectively to the active collaboration of firms with their stakeholders in value creation, or to the participation of design users in the design research process, there has arguably been little common discourse between these academic disciplines. This article seeks to redress this deficiency by connecting marketing and design research together—and particularly the concepts of co-creation and co-design—to advance theory and broaden the scope of applied research into the topic. It does this by elaborating the notion of the pop-up store as temporary place of consumer/user engagement, to build common ground for theory and experimentation in terms of allowing marketers insight into what is meaningful to consumers and in terms of facilitating co-design. The article describes two case studies, which outline how this can occur and concludes by proposing principles and an agenda for future marketing/design pop-up research. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Overdiek A. & Warnaby G. (2020), "Co-creation and co-design in pop-up stores: the intersection of marketing and design research?", Creativity & Innovation Management, Vol. 29, Issue S1, pp. 63-74, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12373. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. LinkedIn: https://nl.linkedin.com/in/overdiek12345
MULTIFILE
This article examines how collaborative design practices in higher education are reshaped through postdigital entanglement with generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). We collectively explore how co-design, an inclusive, iterative, and relational approach to educational design and transformation, expands in meaning, practice, and ontology when GenAI is approached as a collaborator. The article brings together 19 authors and three open reviewers to engage with postdigital inquiry, structured in three parts: (1) a review of literature on co-design, GenAI, and postdigital theory; (2) 11 situated contributions from educators, researchers, and designers worldwide, each offering practice-based accounts of co-design with GenAI; and (3) an explorative discussion of implications for higher education designs and futures. Across these sections, we show how GenAI unsettles assumptions of collaboration, knowing, and agency, foregrounding co-design as a site of ongoing material, ethical, and epistemic negotiation. We argue that postdigital co-design with GenAI reframes educational design as a collective practice of imagining, contesting, and shaping futures that extend beyond human knowing.
MULTIFILE
The context of a societal challenge provides insight into the complexity of the (eco-)system surrounding the current problematic situation: the environment, the stakeholders (including nature), the highlights and frustrations, the conflicts and dilemmas, and the opportunities for change. Why is this co-design session arranged? What problematic situation is encountered? Who (individual or group) took the initiative to act? Is there a specific reason to collaboratively start taking up this societal challenge? Does everyone in this session recognise the problematic situation? Why or why not?
MULTIFILE
Although empathy is an essential aspect of co-design, the design community lacks a systematic overview of the key dimensions and elements that foster empathy in design. This paper introduces an empathic formation compass, based on a comparison of existing relevant frameworks. Empathic formation is defined here as the formative process of becoming an empathic design professional who knows which attitude, skills and knowledge are applicable in a co-design process. The empathic formation compass provides designers with a vocabulary that helps them understand what kind of key dimensions and elements influence empathic formation in co-design and how that informs designers’ role and design decisions. In addition, the empathic formation compass aims to support reflection and to evaluate co-design projects beyond the mere reliance on methods. In this way, empathic design can be made into a conscious activity in which designers regulate and include their own feelings and experiences (first-person perspective), and decrease empathic bias. We identify four important intersecting dimensions that empathy is comprised of in design and describe their dynamic relations. The first two opposing dimensions are denoted by empathy and differentiate between cognitive design processes and affective design experiences, and between self-and other orientation. The other two dimensions are defined by design research and differentiate between an expert and a participatory mindset, and research-and design-led techniques. The empathic formation compass strengthens and enriches our earlier work on mixed perspectives with these specific dimensions and describes the factors that foster empathy in design from a more contextual position. We expect the empathic formation compass—combined with the mixed perspectives framework—to enhance future research by bringing about a deeper understanding of designers’ empathic and collaborative design practice.
DOCUMENT
Background: Many intervention development projects fail to bridge the gap from basic research to clinical practice. Instead of theory-based approaches to intervention development, co-design prioritizes the end users’ perspective as well as continuous collaboration between stakeholders, designers, and researchers throughout the project. This alternative approach to the development of interventions is expected to promote the adaptation to existing treatment activities and to be responsive to the requirements of end users. Objective: The first objective was to provide an overview of all activities that were employed during the course of a research project to develop a relapse prevention intervention for interdisciplinary pain treatment programs. The second objective was to examine how co-design may contribute to stakeholder involvement, generation of relevant insights and ideas, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design. Methods: We performed an embedded single case study and used the double diamond model to describe the process of intervention development. Using all available data sources, we also performed deductive content analysis to reflect on this process. Results: By critically reviewing the value and function of a co-design project with respect to idea generation, stakeholder involvement, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design, we demonstrated how co-design shaped the transition from ideas, via concepts, to a prototype for a relapse prevention intervention. Conclusions: Structural use of co-design throughout the project resulted in many different participating stakeholders and stimulating design activities. As a consequence, the majority of the components of the final prototype can be traced back to the information that stakeholders provided during the project. Although this illustrates how co-design facilitates the integration of contextual information into the intervention design, further experimental testing is required to evaluate to what extent this approach ultimately leads to improved usability as well as patient outcomes in the context of clinical practice.
LINK
